| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2018-11-09 | |||
| 16:12:08 | mriedem | of course this is where someone says, "just attach a data volume and rewrite the application to use that" | |
| 16:12:15 | spatel | sean-k-mooney: thanks for clear that point.. :) i have all unicast workload | |
| 16:15:24 | dansmith | mriedem: did he say snapshot wasn't supported? I would think it would be | |
| 16:16:06 | dansmith | the airplane wifi is sucking too hard for me to even open it again | |
| 16:16:12 | mriedem | it wasn't mentioned | |
| 16:16:25 | mriedem | that's why i asked, because it sure seems like a lot can't be supported | |
| 16:18:24 | mriedem | we got a bug b/c of the limit of tenant ids for the aggregate multitenancy isolation filter, that's resolved with the placement request filter, but doesn't look like the docs for the placement filter mention you can namespace the metadata so you can add as many tenants as you want | |
| 16:18:26 | dansmith | mriedem: the suspend/resume and live migration are about in-memory state, which is why they're hard to support I think | |
| 16:18:35 | dansmith | snapshot, reboot, cold migrate should all be fine I would think | |
| 16:18:44 | dansmith | based on my reading and assumptions about how this works | |
| 16:19:07 | dansmith | mriedem: hmm, I was sure I put that in there | |
| 16:19:58 | mriedem | don't see it, i can push up something for that | |
| 16:20:09 | dansmith | okay | |
| 16:20:15 | mriedem | and i'll probably update the docs for the old filter to mention the limitation (and link to the bug) and say the placement one is a better replacement | |
| 16:21:31 | dansmith | ack | |
| 16:21:36 | dansmith | did I have it in the commit message or something? | |
| 16:21:40 | dansmith | I was sure I wrote words about this | |
| 16:22:49 | mriedem | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/545002/27 "This also allows making this filter advisory but not required, and supports multiple tenants per aggregate, unlike the original filter." | |
| 16:22:51 | mriedem | maybe that | |
| 16:24:52 | dansmith | nova with the ``filter_tenant_id`` key (optionally suffixed with any string for | |
| 16:24:52 | dansmith | multiple tenants, | |
| 16:24:55 | dansmith | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/557490/8/releasenotes/notes/tenant_aggregate_placement_filter-c2fed8889f43b6e3.yaml | |
| 16:24:58 | dansmith | in the reno not hte docs | |
| 16:25:04 | dansmith | tha's mah bad | |
| 16:25:22 | mriedem | k, i'll copy that | |
| 16:28:58 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Calculate port_id rp_uuid mapping for binding https://review.openstack.org/616239 | |
| 16:28:59 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Pass allocations and traits to neturonv2 api https://review.openstack.org/616240 | |
| 16:28:59 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Send RP uuid in the port binding https://review.openstack.org/569459 | |
| 16:29:00 | openstackgerrit | Balazs Gibizer proposed openstack/nova master: Test boot with more ports with bandwidth request https://review.openstack.org/573317 | |
| 16:33:39 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Mention meta key suffix in tenant isolation with placement docs https://review.openstack.org/616991 | |
| 16:38:36 | mriedem | sean-k-mooney: is it just me or is NeutronLinuxBridgeInterfaceDriver completely replaced with os-vif now? | |
| 16:41:50 | sean-k-mooney | ill need to check but probably | |
| 16:42:17 | mriedem | i think it would only be used via the linuxnet_interface_driver config option, but i don't see anything with neutron in nova using the code path that hits that option | |
| 16:42:21 | mriedem | only the nova-network l3 stuff | |
| 16:42:46 | sean-k-mooney | we can likely kill it when we kill nova networks | |
| 16:42:59 | mriedem | sure but this is a neutron-specific driver | |
| 16:43:45 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: ill look into it next week while and see what its actully used for but your right | |
| 16:44:12 | sean-k-mooney | * while ye are at the summit | |
| 16:45:17 | cfriesen | stephenfin: question about your commit https://review.openstack.org/#/c/526329 One of our guys says he ran into a scenario in pike where "image_chunks" itself was None due to things like firewall breakage or server-side problems. Does that get handled properly currently? | |
| 16:46:17 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova stable/pike: Fix the request context in ServiceFixture https://review.openstack.org/599839 | |
| 16:46:23 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova stable/pike: Add functional test for affinity with multiple cells https://review.openstack.org/599840 | |
| 16:54:27 | openstackgerrit | Matt Riedemann proposed openstack/nova master: Delete NeutronLinuxBridgeInterfaceDriver https://review.openstack.org/616995 | |
| 17:03:23 | cfriesen | mriedem: regarding the disk sector size issue...are you aware of any 8K sector disks or did you suggest it for future expansion? | |
| 17:03:35 | stephenfin | cfriesen: Based on that as-is, it would not | |
| 17:04:02 | stephenfin | cfriesen: Though I'd have expected to see an exception raised by the client, more so than anything else | |
| 17:06:04 | mriedem | cfriesen: was just suggesting based on what was noted in the bug report | |
| 17:07:15 | sean-k-mooney | im not aware of any 8k sector discs but i belive we can also diskcover the sector size by querying the disk via sysfs so we proably dont need to hardcode it | |
| 17:07:30 | sean-k-mooney | that said 4k and 512 are the most common | |
| 17:07:56 | cfriesen | I thought that 4K was still the highest supported physical sector size (since you'd want to be able to read a whole disk sector into a memory page) | |
| 17:08:07 | dansmith | not everyone uses 4k pages :) | |
| 17:08:26 | sean-k-mooney | power pc i think is 16k | |
| 17:08:30 | dansmith | I thought there were some SAN types that used larger sector sizes just because of the network optimization, | |
| 17:08:36 | dansmith | even if not backed by actual 8k | |
| 17:09:01 | cfriesen | as far as I know the block size can be different from the sector size | |
| 17:09:04 | dansmith | also, netapp I think uses some super odd sizes, even to the point of having weirdly low-level-formatted drives for them | |
| 17:09:38 | sean-k-mooney | i know some raid controls can be configured to exposed larger sector sizes but i dont know how common that is anymore | |
| 17:09:53 | dansmith | yep | |
| 17:10:41 | sean-k-mooney | mriedem: i think one of the things you suggested was just making a config option correct | |
| 17:11:34 | sean-k-mooney | something like directio_sector_sizes=512,4096 | |
| 17:13:32 | dansmith | ah, but it's hidden to the LUN: https://kb.netapp.com/app/answers/answer_view/a_id/1001353/~/how-can-the-bytes%2Fsector-be-changed-in-a-luns-geometry%3F- | |
| 17:14:46 | cfriesen | the goal here is to figure out if the filesystem supports O_DIRECT. according to the man page, this should be set to the logical block size of the underlying storage, which can be determined using the ioctl() BLKSSZGET operation or by calling "blockdev --getss" | |
| 17:16:20 | sean-k-mooney | cfriesen: i think part of the issue is that on older kernel < 2.4 O_DIRECT required alinged access | |
| 17:16:42 | sean-k-mooney | but on bsd and newer linux kernel O_DIRECT did not reuqire alinged acess | |
| 17:17:13 | sean-k-mooney | cfriesen: im not actully sure of we need to do the alignment check we are doing anymore | |
| 17:17:30 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova stable/queens: fixtures: Track volume attachments within CinderFixtureNewAttachFlow https://review.openstack.org/612494 | |
| 17:17:34 | cfriesen | the man page says: Under Linux 2.4, transfer sizes, and the alignment of the user buffer | |
| 17:17:34 | cfriesen | and the file offset must all be multiples of the logical block size | |
| 17:17:34 | cfriesen | of the filesystem. Since Linux 2.6.0, alignment to the logical block | |
| 17:17:34 | cfriesen | size of the underlying storage (typically 512 bytes) suffices. | |
| 17:17:40 | cfriesen | oh, ick. sorry | |
| 17:17:42 | openstackgerrit | Merged openstack/nova stable/queens: Add regression test for bug#1784353 https://review.openstack.org/612495 | |
| 17:19:05 | sean-k-mooney | cfriesen: ok so we still need aligned acess but the function is ment to determin if directio is possibel what its currently doing is determing if direct 512B aligned acess is possible with is a different thing | |
| 17:19:34 | cfriesen | agreed. I think switching to 4K would cover 95% of the cases. | |
| 17:19:50 | cfriesen | doing it totally correctly woudl require querying the block size from the OS for that specific device | |
| 17:20:46 | mriedem | sean-k-mooney: i suggested a config option as an option because this sounds very hit or miss | |
| 17:21:31 | sean-k-mooney | well the backing store for libvirt instance is only going to be on one mountpoint | |
| 17:21:33 | mriedem | this is definitely not something i've got a lot of experience in though | |
| 17:22:18 | sean-k-mooney | presumable it will all have the same alignment/sector size so we could jsut have a single valus and defualt it to 512 and they could set it to 4k or 8k if they have something else | |
| 17:23:02 | sean-k-mooney | the other option is just super over align to like a 64K bondary | |
| 17:23:28 | sean-k-mooney | that said im sure someone will have a 128K lun now that i have said that | |
| 17:24:25 | cfriesen | so guaranteed setting it to 4K will work for both 4K and 512b disks, so I think 4K should be the default | |
| 17:24:58 | sean-k-mooney | cfriesen: its also the most common sector size on most new disks so ya that should work | |
| 17:25:10 | dansmith | for years now | |
| 17:25:25 | cfriesen | I'd be okay with a config option if someone has weird hardware | |
| 17:26:20 | sean-k-mooney | cfriesen: so your going to submit a patch :)_ | |
| 17:26:47 | cfriesen | there's already a patch in progress | |
| 17:26:53 | cfriesen | by someone else | |
| 17:27:09 | mriedem | wee https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1798688 | |
| 17:27:10 | openstack | Launchpad bug 1798688 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "AllocationUpdateFailed_Remote: Failed to update allocations for consumer. Error: another process changed the consumer after the report client read the consumer state during the claim" [Undecided,Triaged] | |
| 17:27:21 | mriedem | looks like our scheduler allocation claim races have shot up since nov 4 | |
| 17:28:31 | cfriesen | mriedem: did you want to get the person to update the 4K patch to add a config option? or change the hardcoded number to 4K (which is still an improvement) and add the config option later if someone complains? | |
| 17:29:11 | dansmith | mriedem: what does that mean exactly? just the scheduler having to retry the allocation part? | |
| 17:29:29 | mriedem | dansmith: we already retry on PUT allocations in the scheduler | |
| 17:29:39 | mriedem | maybe the error message changed and we're not retrying properly now? | |
| 17:29:41 | mriedem | i haven't dug in yet | |
| 17:29:53 | mriedem | cfriesen: the patch already just changes 512 to 4k right? | |
| 17:30:06 | mriedem | cfriesen: i believe i just said we might want a 'fixes' release note for it | |
| 17:30:07 | mriedem | as a heads up | |
| 17:30:09 | melwitt | cfriesen: this is the method we have to checking for directio, if that's the same thing you mentioned earlier https://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/master/nova/privsep/utils.py#L34 | |
| 17:30:10 | dansmith | mriedem: I know we do, I'm wondering if you mean it's just having to retry more lately or if it's failing | |